Should fat children be given liency and discrimantory rights?!

Should fat children be given liency and discrimantory rights?

After recently reading a new article I am uncertain we are attacking obseity correctly. http://health.yahoo.com/news/177292...

Right now we are dealing with an overwhelming realization that not only adults, but children are struggling with obseity. Currently there is a movement that is saying overwieght people should be given a protection of their rights based on discrimination because of their weight. Before we even begin this "Don't pick on me" attitude and the multitude of articles on why fat people are picked on there should be serious research done on why children and adults are overweight. Yes diet is important, but also just as important, especially since once you become obese is it very difficult to lose weight, is other factors such as hormonal and chemical imbalances. Many factors must be overcome before any person, especially children can lose weight. Being overweight is a solvable problem unlike race or disability.

Under no circumstances should there be any attempt at legislating "fat rights" for the obese. While some people are obese because of legitimate health problems, the sad fact is that the vast majority of Americans are fat because we eat too much, especially processed, junk and fast "foods", and we don't exercise. In short, through their own behaviors, people choose to be fat or not. There should be no legal protections for a choice like that.

Sure, fat people are picked on, ridiculed and subject to derision, but then again so are people who are too short, too tall, wear glasses, have bad acne, big ears, big noses, plank feet, lack any fashion sense, wear dreadlocks, have bad hygiene and on and on and on. It is part of human nature - one of its more regrettable parts, perhaps - to identify and exacerbate such differences.

But let's also define what it means to discriminate. Calling people names isn't discrimination in a legal sense. If a qualified candidate isn't hired for a job because of his or her obesity, one "might" call that discrimination. If we prohibit this practice, then we might as well prohibit the practice of passing over for hire people who are heavily tattooed. Many prospective employers see physical appearance as a factor in hiring considerations, especially when the job involves dealing with the public. For this reason, many employers are reluctant to hire the grossly fat, poorly groomed, heavily inked or pierced. I don't consider this discrimination in a punative sense at all. People make choices about their lives, their bodies, they should be prepared to accept the consequences of those choices. Obesity from non-medical causes IS a choice and is not deserving of legal protection, period.

In the end, if we wish to change it, we can - provided we are willing to make the necessary sacrifices involved. For starters, we can stop buying the crap being sold to us from every imaginable venue. We can stop letting corporations decide what is "cool" or "fun" or right for us and make those determinations ourselves. Does anyone really need fruit "roll-ups"? Does Burger King really improve your quality of life? Is getting the family around a bucket of KFC really going to "bring back dinner"? When will parents stop letting their children decide matters of nutrition for themselves? Frankly, I don't care if my kid prefers macaroni and "cheez" out of the box: it's crap food and he's not getting it. Period. Here's a news flash for ya: Forcing your child to eat nutritious meals made from *gasp!* whole foods is not child abuse. Feeding them a non-stop parade of fluffernutters, pizza, dogs, burgers, fries, nuggets and sugar coated frosting bombs, however, just might be, given the consequences.

Wise up, America. If we're fat, it's no one's fault but ours.